31.12.2012 Views

Religious Intolerance in the Later Roman Empire - Bad request ...

Religious Intolerance in the Later Roman Empire - Bad request ...

Religious Intolerance in the Later Roman Empire - Bad request ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

9.38.3 of 367 Valent<strong>in</strong>ian had ordered <strong>the</strong> release of “those persons who are bound by<br />

crim<strong>in</strong>al charges or who are conf<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>in</strong> prison” which presumably meant those <strong>in</strong><br />

prison await<strong>in</strong>g trial as well as those convicted and <strong>in</strong> prison await<strong>in</strong>g punishment.<br />

Similarly, his CTh. 9.38.4 of 370 pardoned those “tormented by <strong>the</strong> unhappy<br />

expectation of judicial <strong>in</strong>vestigation under torture and <strong>the</strong> fear of punishment” which<br />

aga<strong>in</strong> presumably meant those await<strong>in</strong>g trial and those convicted and await<strong>in</strong>g<br />

punishment. In his amnesty however, Theodosius appears to have excluded those<br />

persons not yet convicted, or at least he has not made <strong>the</strong>ir pardons so explicit. Const.<br />

Sirm. 7 ordered “those persons who are disturbed by <strong>the</strong> terror of imm<strong>in</strong>ent<br />

punishment shall be restored by <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>dulgence of unexpected compassion to perpetual<br />

security.” 28 Fur<strong>the</strong>r on Theodosius announced, “F<strong>in</strong>ally, <strong>the</strong>refore…we remit <strong>the</strong><br />

punishment of crimes.” 29 So those <strong>in</strong> prison under suspicion and await<strong>in</strong>g trial were<br />

apparently excluded from <strong>the</strong> amnesty.<br />

Nicephorus Gregoras, a later Byzant<strong>in</strong>e source, records <strong>the</strong> addressee Eutropius<br />

as be<strong>in</strong>g “a companion and of <strong>the</strong> same way of thought as [<strong>the</strong> emperor] Julian.”<br />

Which <strong>in</strong>dicates that Gregoras believed Eutropius was a pagan. However it is<br />

unknown what source Gregoras used to come to this conclusion; presumably he used<br />

Eutropius’ own Breviarum. However, throughout his work, Eutropius does not<br />

directly discuss paganism, or even religion <strong>in</strong> general. He makes a number of<br />

references to religious practices, but only of a very general nature; his most frequent is<br />

that upon death an emperor might be deified, he usually uses <strong>the</strong> phrase “enrolled<br />

among <strong>the</strong> gods,” which was also applied to all three of Valens’ Christian<br />

predecessors. 30 Eutropius records that he accompanied Julian on his Persian campaign:<br />

“I was also a member of this expedition,” 31 and it seems likely that Gregoras<br />

28<br />

ut illos, quos im m <strong>in</strong>entis supplicii terror exagitat, <strong>in</strong>speratae m iserationis <strong>in</strong>dultio securitati perpetuae<br />

restitutos<br />

29<br />

ideo denique…noxas rem ittim us<br />

30<br />

He generally uses <strong>the</strong> phrase “<strong>in</strong>ter div os relatus est.” 10.8.2 for Constant<strong>in</strong>e's deification; 10.15.2 for<br />

Constantius’; 10.18.2 for Jovian’s. All translations from Eutropius’ Breviarium are those of Bird (1993).<br />

31<br />

Eutr. 10.16.1 cui expeditioni ego quoque <strong>in</strong>terfui<br />

172

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!